Still not 'duly elected' ... anything -- Kari Lake, TFG Endorsee

[Foggy]

Off Topic

I hope they have some lawyers who ... don't celebrate Christmas, and who maybe don't mind working on Sunday.

Those are my favorite lawyers anyway.

I was one of them, in a previous century.

You used to be Jewish? Who knew?

Lots of lawyers who aren't Jewish don't celebrate Christmas and don't mind working on Sunday. I'm agnostic, and before I married a Christian (sorta) woman, I practiced law for 16 years, and never celebrated Christmas even once. Maybe gift exchanges with my fambly, that's what.

And since I don't attend church, I never did mind working on Sunday. I get up every Sunday, including this morning, and work on Fogbow. I do lots of other stuff, too also.

Admittedly, I have that in common with my Jewish friends. I think Buddhists and Muslims and Hindus don't celebrate Christmas and don't mind working on Sunday, too also. I dunno.

But no, nobody knew I was Jewish, because I'm not. Until 23 and Me says otherwise. I have two friends who learned they were Jewish late in life, so anything's possible!

[Luke]

Many of the lawyers from these election cases are on Twitter. Hearing the lying, grifting, nastiness and disinformation is pissing them off. The MAGAts may have pushed them hard enough to go for big sanctions. Of course, these were frivolous cases so sanctions are needed, but the way Rachel talked about Dan (which got back to him, he's on Twitter), I bet he's mad as hell and will take it out on them. It's great Rachel blocked many of us, including a nice lady who is GOP and was active during the trials, posting on AZLaw. We're now using Rachel's thread to talk about her ignorance, grift, MAGA fails and fun stuff like that.

Since we're banned, shirley she won't mind us posting there.

About GOP Nicole getting blocked, Rachel is such a moran:

Nicole Cantelme @NicoleCantelme 5h
Replying to @Orly_licious @trixie_pine and 10 others
That’s hilarious. I have never met her. My husband (an R election lawyer) knows her, I believe.

I don’t remember the details of her suspension, but I do remember that her boss, former Maricopa Cty Att’y Andy Thomas was disbarred & the cases are related

.

Nicole Cantelme @NicoleCantelme
Replying to @Orly_licious @trixie_pine and 10 others
I didn’t see the ugly goodbye tweet b/c she [Rachel] blocked me. But I wouldn’t expect anything less.

I have worked in State gov’t, clerked for an appellate judge, and I believe deeply in the rule of law and our structure of gov’t. I detest identity politics—character matters.
1:49 AM · Dec 25, 2022

Tom Ryan Retweeted your reply
She sure is. And Rachel Alexander @Rach_IC was beyond unprofessional in her response to @DanCBarr. Meanwhile she worships Phill Kline, the disbarred (in 2011) former AG of Kansas who lost ALL of his 2020 election cases & is always wrong in his predictions. https://arizonasuntimes.com/2022/12/17/ ... dismissed/

Looks like fun on Monday. Have made some new friends on both sides of the aisle. One MAGAt was so disgusting that Republican Tom and I both donated to charity in his name. Tim picked BLM & I did a little donation to March For Our Lives. Didn't know him before but we felt strongly that on Christmas, we should try to neutralize the horrible negative energy the best we could.

If they can get sanctions through (the Elias Law Group's lawyers took the lead for Gov-elect Hobbs, they're experienced in this) it would be fabulous. Just the win is great, now AZ will have a Democratic Governor for 2024 But making it hurt & spending the marks' money would be a cherry on top.

[jemcanada2]

They didn’t prove their case in court? All the “good” lawyers know the time to prove your case is not during the trial.

[bob]

As someone who interacted with Leo a bit back in the early birther days, I'd say that his emotional attachments to both his conviction of what is "right" and his own intellectual prowess require not only that the "good guys" are justified, but also that his theories are the correct justification. In other words, he can't just be certain that Lake was cheated out of a victory, his own ego requires that he knows how that cheating occurred. My guess is that he bumped on this particular theory as something that wasn't the most well-known, but, if true, would swing the election and used his birther special power -- an incredibly strong confirmation bias -- to do the rest.

I think Donofrio is smart enough to realize there needs to be a big number. Since the error has to have the possibility of affecting the outcome, the more people possibly affected means it is easier to doubt the election's reliability.

Nevermind there's no actual evidence of the massive disenfranchisement that Donofrio imagines.

Too also: When your belief is so crazy that even the actual litigant doesn't bother to raise it in court, then you can say the judge never disagreed with you. In other words, the Monday morning quarterback remains undefeated.


"For completeness":

"If I'm right" doing all the work there.


"We" "convict" them?

[p0rtia]

Thinking about how Kari Lakes entire case rested on the testimony of Mr. Baris from Big Data Polls, who based his Certainty that 20,000 or more people decided not to vote on Election day, on the fact that only 75 percent of respondents to his voting survey--IOW 75 percent of those who had agreed to do the survey and said previously that they intended to vote on election day--reported that they had indeed voted on election day, which he said was an unheard of low number and thus could Only Mean that the Chaos at the Polls had scared the rest away. Which he extrapolated to mean 20,000 to 40,000 voters.

Anyway.

I heard the testimony that his survey participants number around 850. I'm not sure if that is respondents or just how many people they contacted initially; meaning the number of respondents might have been lower. So if, for example, 50 percent of that 850 said they planned to vote on election day (425) and 75 percent of 425 later said they voted on election day (318) that would mean the actual number of respondents who didn't follow up was 107. Which, IDK, sounds like an awfully Small Sample Size to extrapolate into 20-40 thou. And yes, that's before we talk about how many voted for Lake.

I've looked, but I can't find the actual numbers "Red Tsunami Will Bring 75 Republican Seats to the House in 2022" Baris gave for the above. Did anyone else hear and remember?

[Foggy]

From tweet above:

Happy Christmas @KariLake You have very ...

In America, we say "Merry Christmas" not "Happy Christmas". Are you even a American, Leo?

[Danraft]

As far as the survey goes and the low number of people that completed it…

I posit that a lot of people that voted for Lake were ashamed. They did so out of party loyalty and held their nose while they did it. I know reasonable people that did that in 2016 with Trump. So, they didn’t want to talk about it.

Alternatively, there were some that voted against Lake and felt ashamed they had broken party loyalty and didn’t want to talk about it.

Kari wasn’t putting a lot of warm fuzzies out there.

[Slarti the White]

Thinking about how Kari Lakes entire case rested on the testimony of Mr. Baris from Big Data Polls, who based his Certainty that 20,000 or more people decided not to vote on Election day, on the fact that only 75 percent of respondents to his voting survey--IOW 75 percent of those who had agreed to do the survey and said previously that they intended to vote on election day--reported that they had indeed voted on election day, which he said was an unheard of low number and thus could Only Mean that the Chaos at the Polls had scared the rest away. Which he extrapolated to mean 20,000 to 40,000 voters.

Anyway.

I heard the testimony that his survey participants number around 850. I'm not sure if that is respondents or just how many people they contacted initially; meaning the number of respondents might have been lower. So if, for example, 50 percent of that 850 said they planned to vote on election day (425) and 75 percent of 425 later said they voted on election day (318) that would mean the actual number of respondents who didn't follow up was 107. Which, IDK, sounds like an awfully Small Sample Size to extrapolate into 20-40 thou. And yes, that's before we talk about how many voted for Lake.

I've looked, but I can't find the actual numbers "Red Tsunami Will Bring 75 Republican Seats to the House in 2022" Baris gave for the above. Did anyone else hear and remember?

As with any polling, the devil is in the details -- and the details here would likely make things even worse than you suggest. Let's say that there were three groups: those that were contacted, those that responded (and said they were planning on voting), and those that followed up. That means that there were (at least!) three selections which they are assuming have no bias. That is... unlikely. Throw in another selection (whether people said they intended to vote for Lake or Hobbes) and you've got four bottlenecks of bias in your extrapolation. Mark Twain said that there are lies, damned lies, and statistics. I think we need another category, because stuff like this goes way beyond all three.

[pipistrelle]

As far as the survey goes and the low number of people that completed it…

I posit that a lot of people that voted for Lake were ashamed. They did so out of party loyalty and held their nose while they did it. I know reasonable people that did that in 2016 with Trump. So, they didn’t want to talk about it.

I don't disagree with you, and I have no party so no party loyalty. But I wonder how anyone can have party loyalty when the party they are loyal to supports such candidates and such positions.

[I know one Republican who broke with the party over their position on climate change and environment and expresses horror over tfg, Boebert, Greene, Gaetz, et al., and is appalled at the Republican lack of support for Ukraine He's still under the misapprehension Republicans are better with the economy but he votes Democratic now.]

[Slarti the White]

As someone who interacted with Leo a bit back in the early birther days, I'd say that his emotional attachments to both his conviction of what is "right" and his own intellectual prowess require not only that the "good guys" are justified, but also that his theories are the correct justification. In other words, he can't just be certain that Lake was cheated out of a victory, his own ego requires that he knows how that cheating occurred. My guess is that he bumped on this particular theory as something that wasn't the most well-known, but, if true, would swing the election and used his birther special power -- an incredibly strong confirmation bias -- to do the rest.

I think Donofrio is smart enough to realize there needs to be a big number. Since the error has to have the possibility of affecting the outcome, the more people possibly affected means it is easier to doubt the election's reliability.

Nevermind there's no actual evidence of the massive disenfranchisement that Donofrio imagines.

Too also: When your belief is so crazy that even the actual litigant doesn't bother to raise it in court, then you can say the judge never disagreed with you. In other words, the Monday morning quarterback remains undefeated.

You hit it on the head when you said "if I'm right" is doing all the work there. That's classic Paraclete reasoning. There's a whole bunch of sound logic that is, nonetheless, dependent on some point of fact which is dubious. The "patter" is all about keeping people from noticing that point of fact.

To give an example from an unrelated theory from Leo D., in his video claiming the moon landings were a hoax (yes, he went there) he notes that the astronaut's audio includes the sound of impact when a hammer is thrown and hits the lunar lander. This is a big deal because "everybody knows" that sound cannot travel in a vacuum, right? Except that there is a perfectly fine medium for sound to travel through in the lander, the lunar surface, and the astronaut's space suit, which can then propagate to the mic via the atmosphere inside.

Once you see the trick the whole house of cards falls, but all the true believers want Leo to be right so bad that they have blinded themselves to any flaws.

[Suranis]

Plus the moons surface isn't a vacuum. It's very, very thin, but the moon does have an atmosphere. Whether it would be thick enough to transmit sound is beyond my pay grade.

[SlimSloSlider]

Rich Baris polled 813 voters in Maricopa County, of a total of 1,543,066 votes cast, i.e. .0527%

Yet he boldly asserted under oath that he could say that the number of voters who indicated to him that they encountered difficulties in voting could be extrapolated to mean that Kari Lake had lost over the 17,116 votes she needed to defeat Hobbs.

Baris is in Gainesville, Florida and has a 3-year undergrad degree in Political science.
He self-published a libertarian screed which is rife with spelling and grammar errors.
He last major media appearance was on Tucker Carlson’s show about the Big Lie conspiracy, alleging that dead people voted in the 2020 election, for which Twitter banned him and his wife.

He is a Christian.
He ought to check out the Fourth Commandment.

[Slarti the White]

Plus the moons surface isn't a vacuum. It's very, very thin, but the moon does have an atmosphere. Whether it would be thick enough to transmit sound is beyond my pay grade.

I doubt it would be as good a medium for sound transmissions as the solids, but the point is that the impact creates vibrational energy which propagates through available media. That energy is the same whether or not there is an atmosphere. While the materials in which that energy propagates may be more "lossy" than pressure waves in one standard atmosphere of pressure, they could still account for the observed sound.

[Foggy]

Rich Baris ...

He ought to check out the Fourth Commandment.

Is that the one that says "If you're crazy enough, Donald Trump might notice you and say something nice"?

Oh, wait, you mean the one in the Bible. Isn't there a group of GOP commandments?

[humblescribe]

As with any polling, the devil is in the details -- and the details here would likely make things even worse than you suggest. Let's say that there were three groups: those that were contacted, those that responded (and said they were planning on voting), and those that followed up. That means that there were (at least!) three selections which they are assuming have no bias. That is... unlikely. Throw in another selection (whether people said they intended to vote for Lake or Hobbes) and you've got four bottlenecks of bias in your extrapolation. Mark Twain said that there are lies, damned lies, and statistics. I think we need another category, because stuff like this goes way beyond all three.

I'd like to propose . . ."lies, damned lies, statistics, and Magatmatics."

[jcolvin2]

I'd like to propose . . ."lies, damned lies, statistics, and Magatmatics."

Magatmatic is a higher order math - it uses imaginary numbers.

[Foggy]

Arizona has to win some sorta prize for the stupidest election in 2022.

Even if the voters prevailed in the long run.

[raison de arizona]

I listened to a lengthy interview of Baris on Charlie Kirk’s podcast. I was unimpressed, to say the least. They kept talking about how he doesn’t have credentials, but has “street cred.” Harumph. And bah humbug.

[Foggy]

Charlie Kirk wouldn't know street cred if it flew into his unibrow.

[keith]

Arizona has to win some sorta prize for the stupidest election in 2022.

Even if the voters prevailed in the long run.

Yeah, I'd agree that Az wins the 'stupidesr after election', category, but I'd nominate Idaho for 'stupidest election overall'. Al Bundy got 100k votes for crying out loud.

[raison de arizona]

Here are all the universes that don’t exist.

Maricopa County's Co-Elections Director testified that not only DID the problems occur on Election Day but had happened for three elections prior.

Despite this, Maricopa County used these machines, did not divulge this information to the public, & certified the election anyway.

They were performing a “root cause analysis” on problems that didn’t exist, while withholding the existence of the problem from the public. no problem!

No portion of the judgement dismissing @KariLake’s lawsuit addresses this unbelievable admission
Embedded video

The judge gave us an impossible hurdle to clear.

Intentionality. We cleared it anyway.

No universe exists where these machines went down by accident.

No universe exists where @katiehobbs wins a legitimate election.

And no universe exists where @KariLake surrenders this fight.

[realist]

The judge gave us an impossible hurdle to clear.

If an impossible hurdle is proving up your case with credible evidence and facts, then yes, yes he did.

[jcolvin2]

Here are all the universes that don’t exist.

No universe exists where these machines went down by accident.

No universe exists where @katiehobbs wins a legitimate election.

And no universe exists where @KariLake surrenders this fight.

Poor Kari is miles down the rabbit hole. Only one of her statements could conceivably be true.

[Gregg]

Charlie Kirk wouldn't know street cred if it flew into his unibrow.

Street cred from a guy who obviously got beat up every day of his life until he was 30 years old.

[Frater I*I]

I listened to a lengthy interview of Baris on Charlie Kirk’s podcast. I was unimpressed, to say the least. They kept talking about how he doesn’t have credentials, but has “street cred.” Harumph. And bah humbug.

Street cred...????

What street would that be...Sesame Street??




I'll come in again....